towards a better exploitation of the technical potential...

Towards a better exploitation of the technical potential of waste-to-energy

Hans Saveyn, Peter Eder, Mark

Ramsay, Grgoire Thonier, Kathryn

Warren, Mathieu Hestin

2016

EUR 28230 EN

2

This publication is a Science for Policy report by the Joint Research Centre (JRC), the European Commissions

science and knowledge service. It aims to provide evidence-based scientific support to the European

policymaking process. The scientific output expressed does not imply a policy position of the European

Commission. Neither the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission is

responsible for the use that might be made of this publication.

Contact information

Name: Hans Saveyn

Address: European Commission, JRC, Edificio Expo, Calle Inca Garcilaso 3, E-41092 Sevilla, SPAIN

Email: [email protected]

Tel.: +34 954 488 470

JRC Science Hub

https://ec.europa.eu/jrc

JRC104013

EUR 28230 EN

PDF ISBN 978-92-79-63778-0 ISSN 1831-9424 doi:10.2791/870953

Seville: European Commission, 2016

European Union, 2016

The reuse of the document is authorised, provided the source is acknowledged and the original meaning or

message of the texts are not distorted. The European Commission shall not be held liable for any consequences

stemming from the reuse.

How to cite this report: Saveyn1, H., Eder1, P., Ramsay2, M., Thonier3, G., Warren2, K., Hestin3, M. (2016).

Towards a better exploitation of the technical potential of waste-to-energy. EUR 28230 EN.

DOI:10.2791/870953

a. European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Seville, Spain

b. Ricardo AEA Ltd., Shoreham-by-Sea, UK

c. Bio by Deloitte, Neuilly-sur-Seine, France

All images European Union 2016, except for the cover image (Source: Fotolia.com)

Title Towards a better exploitation of the technical potential of waste-to-energy

Abstract

In the EU, merely six types of wastes cover the lion's share of all the energy in waste going to incineration or

landfill. They include in particular household and similar waste as well as sorting residues, which jointly account

for nearly four fifths of the energy contained in all landfilled waste, and which together with wood waste

comprise almost two thirds of the energy contained in all waste sent for incineration. A wider application of

state-of-the-art techniques could improve the energy currently recovered from waste by more than a quarter. A

better application of the waste hierarchy is expected to cause important changes in the waste-to-energy

landscape in the coming years.

Abstract The present study describes the state-of-play of incineration and other waste

management options for different wastes in the EU, provides an assessment of proven

and emerging techniques for increased energy recovery in waste-to-energy processes

and concludes with an outlook of possible evolutions in the EU's waste-to-energy

landscape.

An analysis of statistical data from Eurostat, enhanced with input from various

industrial federations, revealed that just six types of wastes are responsible for the

lion's share of the energy embedded in all the waste currently sent to incineration

and/or landfill. They include in particular household and similar waste as well as

sorting residues, which jointly account for nearly four fifths of the energy contained in

all landfilled waste, and which together with wood waste comprise almost two thirds

of the energy contained in all waste sent for incineration.

Techniques for improving energy recovery were discussed for each of the five main

categories of waste-to-energy processes: combustion plants, waste incineration

plants, cement and lime kilns, anaerobic digestion plants and others. Figures from

2013/2014 showed that the three middle categories together accounted for an

estimated total annual mixed energy outputs from waste of 676 PJ. Using the

technical options available today, and without taking into account any possible

changes to the types and amounts of waste currently sent for energy recovery, this

value could be increased by more than a quarter. However, future developments in

waste generation and waste management may possibly lead to an increase in energy

recovery by incineration for household and similar waste as well as for sorting

residues, an increase in energy recovery by anaerobic digestion for animal and

vegetal wastes and a decrease in the amounts sent for energy recovery for several

other wastes, including source-separated wastes such as wood waste.

Towards a better exploitation of the technical potential of WtE

4

Executive Summary

Policy background and study objectives

The Energy Union strategy, launched by the European Commission in 2015, aims to

bring greater energy security, sustainability and competitiveness to the European

energy market. As part of the initiatives outlined in the Energy Union Package (COM

(2015) 80 final), the Commission states its intention to further establish synergies

between energy efficiency policies, resource efficiency policies and the circular

economy. This will include providing information on the options for exploiting the

potential of "waste-to-energy" in a Communication.

When waste cannot be prevented or recycled, recovering its energy content is in most

cases preferable to landfilling it, in both environmental and economic terms. Waste-to-

energy can therefore play a role and create synergies with EU energy and climate

policy, but must always be guided by the principles of the EU waste hierarchy. The

Commission will examine how this role can be optimised, without compromising the

achievement of higher reuse and recycling rates, and how the corresponding energy

potential can best be exploited.

The present study, initiated by the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission

at the end of 2015, aims to underpin the forthcoming Communication with a detailed

techno-scientific assessment of the European waste-to-energy landscape. Three main

objectives constitute the core of this assessment:

1. to provide an analysis of the current use of waste for energy recovery in the

EU;

2. to provide an analysis of the technical improvement potential for waste-to-

energy; and

3. to provide an outlook on possible future developments in the waste-to-energy

landscape.

Current use of waste for energy recovery in the EU

For the analysis of the current use of waste for energy recovery in the EU, two sub-

objectives were defined:

to analyse what waste management practices are applied across the EU for

wastes featuring substantial amounts of embedded energy recoverable through

incineration or other waste-to-energy processes; and

to analyse which amounts and what forms of energy are recovered in which

processes for wastes sent for energy recovery.

For the analysis related to the first sub-objective, the main focus of the study was on

incineration with or without energy recovery as well as landfill/disposal. The wastes

considered comprised both regular waste streams (e.g. household and similar waste)

and waste-derived fuels (e.g. biogas). A screening of annual production volumes of

different wastes and their embedded energy content led to a final selection of 13

waste streams and 5 waste-derived fuels, which jointly account for about 96% of the

embedded energy from all wastes sent for waste-to-energy processes. Eurostat data,

complemented and corrected with input from Member State authorities and European

industrial federations, was used for an in-depth analysis for each type of waste. Data

was used from 2006 until the latest available year (2012).


5

No clear evolution over time could be discerned for a number of reasons, including the

effects of the 2008 economic crisis and its aftermath as well as changes to the

methodology over the years, both by Eurostat and individual Member States.

Moreover, the study revealed large differences between Member States in per capita

generation of certain wastes, due to differences in interpretation of waste definitions,

as well as issues with double counting of certain waste types, which were addressed

as much as possible.

Table 1 presents a summary overview of the amounts of waste-embedded energy

going to either incineration or to landfill/disposal, for 15 out of the 18 waste types for

which sufficient data was available (covering 93% of the embedded energy from all

wastes sent for waste-to-energy processes). Analysis of the data presented for these

wastes shows that:

6 types of waste (highlighted in blue in the table) together contain 83% of the

total energy embedded in wastes sent to incineration and 93% of the total

energy embedded in wastes sent to landfill;

3 waste streams only - household and similar wastes (HSW), sorting residues

and wood waste account for nearly two thirds of the energy contained in

waste sent for incineration;

2 waste streams only - household and similar wastes (HSW) and sorting

residues - account for more than three quarters of the energy contained in

landfilled waste.

Therefore, any changes in waste management practices for the six waste types

highlighted in blue in the table, and in particular for household and similar wastes

(HSW) and sorting residues, would be likely to have the largest impacts on the waste-

to-energy landscape in the EU-28.

Table 1 Amounts of waste-embedded energy sent to incineration or to landfill/disposal in 2012 in the EU-28

Incineration (D10+R1)

(PJ3)

Landfill/disposal (D1-D7-D12)

(PJ3)

Wood wastes 375 21% 7 0%

Plastic wastes 61 3% 51 4%

Paper and cardboard wastes 6 0% 3 0%

Textile wastes 2 0% 3 0%

Waste tyres 35 2% 2 0%

Spent solvents 29 2% 0 0%

Waste oils 32 2% 0 0%

Chemical wastes 93 5% 31 2%

Household and similar wastes (HSW) 470 26% 616 44%

Mixed and undifferentiated materials 149 8% 120 9%

Sorting residues 334 18% 489 35%

Animal and vegetal wastes1 70 4% 80 6%

Dried municipal sewage sludge1 22 1% 7 0%

Waste-derived biogas2 108 6% 0 0%

Waste-derived biodiesel2 19 1% 0 0%


6

Incineration (D10+R1)

(PJ3)

Landfill/disposal (D1-D7-D12)

(PJ3)

Total 1,805 100% 1,409 100%

1- For Animal and vegetal wastes and Municipal sewage sludge, energy recovered from anaerobic digestion is taken into account within waste-derived biogas.

2- Biogas and biodiesel are used only for energy purposes, so data for Incineration (D10+R1) PJ is the same as the amount of waste-derived biofuel produced.

3- Data in PJ is calculated by multiplying the amount of waste sent to incineration or landfill by its average lower heating value.

For the analysis related to the second sub-objective, energy recovery processes for

waste were clustered into five groups: Combustion plants, Waste Incineration (WI)

plants, Cement and Lime (CL) production plants, Anaerobic Digestion (AD) plants and

other Waste-to-Energy (WtE) plants (including pyrolysis, gasification and plasma

treatment). Data on the amounts and forms of energy recovered from waste was only

available for the three middle groups (see Table 2). The combined amounts of energy

recovered in these three groups, 676 PJ, represents about 1.5% of the final energy

consumption in the EU-28 (based on average Eurostat values for 2013 and 2014).

Table 2 Estimation of energy recovery from waste in the EU-28 for the five groups of energy recovery processes studied

Combustion plants

WI plants1

CL plants

2

AD plants3

Other WtE

plants

Heat

recovery (PJ)

Electricity recovery

(PJ)

Thermal energy

conversion (PJ)

Heat recovery

(PJ)4

Electricity recovery

(PJ)

Biomethane production

(PJ)

2006

n.a.

180 81 127 n.a. (not available) n.a. 2013 275 110 176

2014 n.a. n.a. n.a. 33 70 12

1- Source: CEWEP. 2- No information for lime production plants. Information for cement kilns from CEMBUREAU. 3- Source: Deloitte calculation based on Eurostat Energy Statistics and EBA data. 4- Heat recovery after exclusion of internal use.

Table 2 shows that, in the period 2006-2013, the amount of energy recovered from

waste increased by 39% for CL plants, by 36% for electricity from WI plants and by

53% for heat from WI plants. The latter can be explained by the significant increase in

the number of WI plants providing combined heat and power (CHP).

Technical improvement potential for waste-to-energy

For the analysis of the technical improvement potential for waste-to-energy,

techniques were evaluated in each of the five waste-to-energy process groups. The

main evaluation criteria were the net annual energy efficiency and the applicability.

The former criterion accounts for any seasonal energy demands (e.g. for heating or

cooling). The latter criterion takes into account the location dependence of any

technique, the number of waste streams and their combined embedded energy that

can benefit from a given technique as well as the possibility to retrofit a technique in

existing installations.


7

Both proven and emerging techniques were studied and the following proven

techniques were selected for their technical improvement potential:

For combustion plants:

o high-efficiency circulating fluidised bed gasification and co-firing of

syngas in the combustion plant: direct incineration of cleaned waste-

derived syngas instead of waste;

o feeding of secondary fuels into a fluidised bed combustion plant: use of

waste-derived Solid Recovered Fuel (SRF) to replace (virgin) biomass.

For waste incineration plants:

o High steam parameters for boilers and superheaters: a set of different

work-arounds to minimise any corrosive effects of waste that may limit

energy recovery efficiency;

o flue-gas condensation and component cooling: recovery of low-grade

heat from flue-gases and cooling water;

o heat pumps: used to upgrade low-temperature waste heat to useful

high-temperature heat;

o district cooling (100% load): using low-grade heat with an absorption

refrigeration system to provide cold liquid for cooling;

o 4th generation heat networks: using low-temperature heat, with low

heat losses.

For cement and lime producing plants:

o conversion of waste heat to power: to partially cover on-site power

demands.

For anaerobic digestion plants:

o sewage sludge advanced AD and thermal hydrolysis process (THP):

hydrothermal destruction of sludge biomass to increase the biogas yield

during the subsequent AD process;

o AD with biomethane injection to grid (Gas-to-Grid): upgrading of biogas

to biomethane for distribution via the existing natural gas grid.

For other plants:

o biodiesel from the hydro treatment of waste edible oils and fats: an

alternative process to fatty methyl esterification, using hydrogen and

steam.

Moreover, an analysis was made of the current energy efficiencies encountered for the

different forms of energy recovered in each of the five waste-to-energy process

groups. A summary overview is provided in Table 3 of what may be considered the

current average and optimised efficiencies in each group.


8

Table 3 Summary table of the current average (Av) and optimised (Opt) energy efficiency for each of the five waste-to-energy process groups

Energy

recovered as

electricity,

efficiency 1

Energy

recovered

as heat,

efficiency 2

CHP

recovery efficiency 3

Energy

recovery

to fuel,

efficiency

Av

%

Opt

%

Av

%

Opt

%

Av

%

Opt

%

Av

%

Opt

%

Electric Heat Electric Heat

Combustion

plants 4 36 40 - - - - - - - -

WI plants 22 5 33 6 72 7 80 8 17 9 51 9 27 10 66 10

- - Total 68 Total 93

CL plants 11 - - 75 80 - - - - - -

AD plants 18 12 23 13 - - 18 14 18 14

- - - 41 15 Total 36

Others 20 16 35 17 75 16 80 8 - - - - - 40 18

Net annual average efficiency: 1 100% electrical load. 2 100% heat load. 3 CHP - 80% of heat sold annually, 100% electrical load.

References: 4 LCP BREF, coal / lignite pulverised combustion 5 ISWA CE report 2015, gross existing plant efficiency corrected to net efficiency 6 AEB Amsterdam / Martin GmBH statistics, refer also High Steam Parameters for Boilers and Superheaters proven technique 7 CEWEP 8 Ricardo estimate based on known boiler efficiencies 9 Annual average efficiency based on ISWA CE report 2015 existing CHP plant gross

efficiencies, corrected to net efficiency with annual average heat load 10 Annual average efficiency based on optimised AEB / Martin GmBH net electrical efficiency and ISWA CE report 2015 high efficiency CHP plant gross efficiencies, corrected to net efficiency with annual average heat load 11 CEMBUREAU 12 ISWA CE report 2015, AD plant net efficiency 13 UK Department of Energy and Climate Change, Advanced AD net efficiency 14 ISWA CE report 2015, net efficiency with annual average heat load 15 ISWA CE report 2015, net efficiency of biomethane production at 100% annual load 16 Typical net power / heat only efficiency of a gasification system as an emerging technique 17 High efficiency claimed by optimised emerging techniques such as Two Stage Combustion with Plasma with energy recovery through an internal combustion engine 18 Typical net efficiency of an emerging technique producing a fuel product


9

Outlook on possible future developments in the waste-to-energy landscape

Due to the issues with statistical data quality outlined in the study and uncertainties

on future developments in waste management in the different Member States, a

detailed forecast of the evolutions in the waste-to-energy landscape could not be

made. Hence a simple approach was followed, using a number of basic assumptions:

Landfill is likely to further decrease in favour of incineration and/or other

options higher up the waste hierarchy. Member States with low landfill rates

can provide an indication of what is already practically achievable.

More and better source-separated collection will reduce the generated amounts

of mixed streams.

The energy efficiency of WtE plants is expected to shift towards best

performing plants.

The outlook was further split into two parts: one part focused on the possible future

role of WtE for the different waste streams, whereas the other part focused on

possible technical improvements to increase energy recovery.

The first part of the outlook assessment led to the following possible evolutions for the

different waste streams:

Household and similar wastes as well as sorting residues: while these streams

may be composed of many materials that individually feature a high recycling

potential, only limited possibilities for high-quality recycling remain once these

materials end up in these mixed streams. Hence, despite the existing potential

for waste prevention and reduced generation of these streams through better

and more widespread source-separated collection, energy recovery is likely to

increase to support the necessary massive diversion from landfill. Moreover,

higher recycling rates for other waste types may lead to a further increase in

the generation of sorting residues, unless the quality of the materials collected

separately at source improves.

Wood, plastic, textile, tyre, solvents, chemical and municipal sewage sludge

wastes: energy recovery could see a reduced role in future, primarily due to

the better application of the waste hierarchy.

Organic waste such as animal and vegetal wastes: energy recovery through

anaerobic digestion may increase rather than incineration, providing both

energy and material recovery.

Mixed and undifferentiated materials: the highly diverse nature of this waste

category makes it difficult to forecast how energy recovery may evolve in the

future.

Paper waste: the high recyclability of this material already results in low

incineration rates today, which are unlikely to rise.

The second part of the outlook assessment demonstrated that implementation of

proven technical solutions to improve energy efficiency for waste incinerators and

cement and lime plants, as well as AD installations, could lead to an increase in the

combined forms of recovered energy of about 29%.


10

Disclaimer

The information and views set out in this report are those of the author(s) and do not

necessarily reflect the official opinion of the Commission. The Commission does not

guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this study. Neither the Commission nor

any person acting on the Commissions behalf may be held responsible for the use

which may be made of the information contained therein.


11

Table of Contents

Abstract ........................................................................................................... 3 Executive Summary ........................................................................................... 4

Policy background and study objectives ............................................................. 4 Current use of waste for energy recovery in the EU ............................................. 4 Technical improvement potential for waste-to-energy .......................................... 6 Outlook on possible future developments in the waste-to-energy landscape ........... 9

Disclaimer .......................................................................................................10 Table of Contents .............................................................................................11 Glossary ..........................................................................................................14 Preface ............................................................................................................17 1 Introduction ...............................................................................................18 2 Purpose of the Study ...................................................................................19

2.1 Purpose of the study in relation to ongoing BREF work ..............................20 2.2 Study constraints .................................................................................20

3 Task 1 - Analysis of the current use of waste for energy recovery in the EU-28 ...21 3.1 Scope of the study ...............................................................................21

3.1.1 Scope of combustible wastes studied ................................................21 3.1.2 Note on terminology .......................................................................23 3.1.3 Comparison of the energy contained in several combustible wastes sent to incineration ............................................................................................24 3.1.4 Scope of the data ...........................................................................26 3.1.5 Risk of double counting ...................................................................27

3.2 Methodology for Task 1 .........................................................................27 3.2.1 Methodology for creation of the database ..........................................27 3.2.2 Analysis of the trends at European and national levels ........................28

3.3 Results of waste streams data collection and analysis ...............................28 3.3.1 Wood wastes .................................................................................28 3.3.2 Plastic wastes ................................................................................33 3.3.3 Paper wastes .................................................................................39 3.3.4 Textile wastes ................................................................................44 3.3.5 Waste tyres and waste rubber .........................................................49 3.3.6 Waste solvents ..............................................................................54 3.3.7 Waste oils (mineral and synthetic)....................................................59 3.3.8 Chemical waste ..............................................................................64 3.3.9 Household and similar wastes ..........................................................69 3.3.10 Mixed and undifferentiated materials ................................................74 3.3.11 Sorting residues .............................................................................79 3.3.12 Animal and vegetal wastes ..............................................................85 3.3.13 Dried municipal sewage sludge ........................................................90

3.4 Results of waste-derived fuels data collection and analysis ........................95 3.4.1 Waste-derived biogas .....................................................................95 3.4.2 Waste-derived bioethanol .............................................................. 100 3.4.3 Waste-derived biodiesel ................................................................ 101 3.4.4 Gaseous output from gasification ................................................... 105 3.4.5 Gaseous, liquid and solid output from pyrolysis ................................ 105

3.5 Discussion on data collection and trend analysis ..................................... 105 3.5.1 Eurostat methodology for data collection ......................................... 105 3.5.2 Quality of the Eurostat data and resulting limitations in data interpretation ........................................................................................... 107

3.6 Identification of combustible waste containing high overall amounts of energy 109


12

3.7 Main pathways for waste-to-energy ...................................................... 111 3.7.1 Identification of the main pathways for waste-to-energy ................... 111 3.7.2 Waste-derived energy recovery for each main pathway ..................... 112

4 Task 2 - Analysis of the technical improvement potential for waste-to-energy .. 116 4.1 Identification of techniques .................................................................. 116

4.1.1 Summary of WtE pathways............................................................ 117 4.2 Technique evaluation methodology ....................................................... 120

4.2.1 Evaluation definitions .................................................................... 120 Combining the applicability subcriteria ......................................................... 122 4.2.2 Approach and Technology Readiness Level ...................................... 124

4.3 Task 2 - Technique dashboard ............................................................. 125 4.4 Combustion plants (other than CL plants) co-incinerating wastes ............. 126

4.4.1 Overview of waste as a secondary fuel in large combustion plants ...... 126 4.4.2 Combustion plants co-incinerating wastes - Proven improvement techniques ............................................................................................... 127 4.4.3 Large combustion plant techniques evaluation ................................. 129

4.5 Waste incineration plants .................................................................... 135 4.5.1 Overview of waste incineration....................................................... 135 4.5.2 Energy efficiency .......................................................................... 137 4.5.3 Waste incineration - Proven energy efficiency improvement techniques 138 4.5.4 Waste incineration techniques evaluation ........................................ 139 4.5.5 Waste incineration plant techniques - Technology to watch ................ 152 4.5.6 Waste incineration techniques evaluation ........................................ 153

4.6 CL plants: Cement and lime production plants ....................................... 159 4.6.1 Overview of waste in CL applications .............................................. 159 4.6.2 Energy efficiency .......................................................................... 159 4.6.3 CL plants - Proven improvement techniques and evaluation ............... 160 4.6.4 CL plant techniques - Technology to watch ...................................... 162 4.6.5 Cement kiln emerging energy efficiency improvement techniques evaluation ................................................................................................ 162

4.7 Anaerobic digestion plants ................................................................... 164 4.7.1 Overview of anaerobic digestion ..................................................... 164 4.7.2 Energy efficiency .......................................................................... 164 4.7.3 Anaerobic digestion - Proven improvement techniques ...................... 166 4.7.4 Anaerobic digestion techniques evaluation ....................................... 167 4.7.5 Anaerobic digestion and biological techniques - Technology to watch .. 174 4.7.6 AD and biological emerging techniques evaluation ............................ 175

4.8 Other waste-to-energy plants .............................................................. 180 4.8.1 Overview of other waste-to-energy plants ....................................... 180 4.8.2 Other WtE plants - Proven improvement techniques and evaluation .... 181 4.8.3 Other WtE plants - Technology to watch .......................................... 182 4.8.4 Other WtE emerging techniques evaluation ..................................... 185

4.9 Detailed analysis of selected techniques ................................................ 202 4.10 Discussion ......................................................................................... 243

4.10.1 Threats and opportunities for full deployment of proven techniques .... 243 4.10.2 Threats and opportunities for full deployment of emerging techniques 244 4.10.3 Ancillary WtE techniques to help address threats and opportunities to WtE 245

4.11 Task 2 - Conclusions on technical improvement potential of WtE .............. 246 4.11.1 Combustion plants co-incinerating waste ......................................... 247 4.11.2 Waste incineration ........................................................................ 247 4.11.3 Cement and lime production .......................................................... 247 4.11.4 Anaerobic digestion ...................................................................... 248 4.11.5 Other WtE processes .................................................................... 248


13

5 Task 3 - Outlook on developments in the waste-to-energy landscape .............. 250 5.1 Possible future role of waste-to-energy for the different waste streams ..... 251

5.1.1 Wood waste ................................................................................. 251 5.1.2 Plastic waste ................................................................................ 252 5.1.3 Paper waste................................................................................. 252 5.1.4 Textile waste ............................................................................... 252 5.1.5 Waste tyres ................................................................................. 252 5.1.6 Waste solvents ............................................................................ 253 5.1.7 Waste oils ................................................................................... 253 5.1.8 Chemical waste ............................................................................ 253 5.1.9 Household and similar waste (HSW) ............................................... 253 5.1.10 Mixed and undifferentiated materials (M&UM) .................................. 254 5.1.11 Sorting residues ........................................................................... 255 5.1.12 Animal and vegetal waste (A&VW).................................................. 255 5.1.13 Dried municipal sewage sludge ...................................................... 256 5.1.14 Summary overview for the various waste streams ............................ 256 5.1.15 Waste-derived fuels ...................................................................... 258

5.2 What will be the expected changes in energy recovered from waste sent to waste-to-energy?......................................................................................... 258

5.2.1 Calculation summary .................................................................... 262 6 Annexes................................................................................................... 263

6.1 Annex 1- List of conversion factors ....................................................... 263 6.1.1 Lower calorific values of wastes ..................................................... 263 6.1.2 Conversion factors for units ........................................................... 264

6.2 Annex 2 - Detailed list of waste treatment methods according to the Waste Statistics Regulation ..................................................................................... 265 6.3 Annex 3 - Mass balance between waste generation and treatment ............ 266

6.3.1 Mass balance for household and similar wastes ................................ 266 6.3.2 Mass balance for mixed and undifferentiated materials ..................... 266 6.3.3 Mass balance for sorting residues ................................................... 267

6.4 Annex 4 - Calculation of improvement technique ratings ......................... 269 6.5 Annex 5 - Subscoring for technique applicability ..................................... 270 6.6 Annex 6 Eurostat EU-28 calculation data for the construction of the two energy recovery scenarios ............................................................................ 272


14

Glossary

Abbreviation Terminology

ABP Animal By-Products

ACT Accelerated Carbonation Technology or Advanced

Conversion Technologies

AD Anaerobic Digestion

ADR Advanced Dry Recovery

Al2O3 Aluminium Oxide

APC Air Pollution Control

APCr Air Pollution Control Residues

ASR Auto Shredder Residue

ATT Advanced Treatment Technology

BFB Bubbling Fluidised Bed

CaO Calcium Oxide

CBM Compressed Biomethane

CCU Carbon Capture and Utilisation

C&IW Commercial and Industrial Waste

CFB Circulating Fluidised Bed

CHP Combined Heat and Power

CO Carbon Monoxide

CO2 Carbon Dioxide

CoP Coefficient of Performance

CV Calorific Value

DHN District Heating Network

DMS Direct Melting System

DS Dry Solids

ECS Eddy Current Separation

EfW Energy from Waste (combustion)

ELP End-of-Life Plastic

Fe2O3 Iron Oxide

FGC Flue-Gas Condensation

FGT Flue-Gas Treatment

FGR Flue-Gas Recirculation

GHG Greenhouse Gas

GtG Gas-to-Grid


15


H2 Hydrogen

H2S Hydrogen Sulphide

HCl Hydrogen Chloride

HF Hydrogen Fluoride

IBA Incinerator Bottom Ash

IED Industrial Emissions Directive

IGCC Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle

ISWA International Solid Waste Association

ITHP Intermediate Thermal Hydrolysis Process

LBM Liquefied Biomethane

LTDH Low-Temperature District Heating

MBT Mechanical and Biological Pretreatment

MCA Multi-Criterion Analysis

MHT Mechanical Heat Treatment

MSW Municipal Solid Waste

MTHW Medium-Temperature Hot Water

NCV Net Calorific Value

NO Nitrogen Oxide

NOX Nitrogen Oxides

NO2 Nitrous Oxide

NTP Non-Thermal Plasma

PCDD/F Polychlorobenzodioxins and Furans

PE Polyethylene

PET Polyethylene terephthalate

PP Polypropylene

PVC Polyvinylchloride

PWN Private Wire Network

RED Renewable Energy Directive

RDF Refuse-Derived Fuel

RFB Revolving Fluidised Bed

ROCs Renewable Obligation Certificates

SCR Selective Catalytic Reduction

SiO2 Silicon Dioxide

SNCR Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction

SOX Sulphur Oxides

SO2 Sulphur Dioxide


16


SRF Solid Recovered Fuel

TDP Thermal Depolymerisation

THP Thermal Hydrolysis Process

TIF Twin Interchanging Fluidised Bed

TOC Total Organic Carbon

TRL Technology Readiness Level

UCO Used Cooking Oil

WDF Waste-Derived Fuel

WFD Waste Framework Directive

WHPG Waste Heat Power Generation

WID Waste Incineration Directive

WtE Waste-to-Energy


17

Preface

Policy background

The Energy Union strategy, launched by the European Commission in 2015, aims to

bring greater energy security, sustainability and competitiveness to the European

energy market. As part of the initiatives outlined in the Energy Union Package (COM

(2015) 80 final), the Commission states its intention to further establish synergies

between energy efficiency policies, resource efficiency policies and the circular

economy. This will include providing information on the options for exploiting the

potential of "waste-to-energy" in a Communication.

When waste cannot be prevented or recycled, recovering its energy content is in most

cases preferable to landfilling it, in both environmental and economic terms. Waste-to-

energy can therefore play a role and create synergies with EU energy and climate

policy, but must always be guided by the principles of the EU waste hierarchy. The

Commission will examine how this role can be optimised, without compromising the

achievement of higher reuse and recycling rates, and how the corresponding energy

potential can best be exploited.

Study objectives

The present study, initiated by the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission

at the end of 2015, aims to underpin the forthcoming Communication with a detailed

techno-scientific assessment of the European waste-to-energy landscape. Three main

objectives constitute the core of this assessment:

1. to provide an analysis of the current use of waste for energy recovery in the

EU;

2. to provide an analysis of the technical improvement potential for waste-to-

energy and;

3. to provide an outlook on possible future developments in the waste-to-energy

landscape

Study methodology and scope

The study methodology, centred on the three main objectives, is detailed in the initial

sections of each main chapter of this document (Chapters 3, 4 and 5).

The scope of the study is clarified in section 3.1, which also elaborates on the different

definitions used in this study and provides a note on terminology.

Acknowledgements

The Joint Research Centre would like to express its gratitude to all stakeholder

organisations that have contributed to this study by providing data and information as

well as suggestions for corrections during the two consultation rounds. These

stakeholders include several Member State authorities as well as industrial federations

at national and European level. In addition, the JRC would like to thank Commission

experts who have contributed to this study, in particular from DG Environment and

Eurostat. The JRC is also grateful to Ms Anna Atkinson for proofreading the final

manuscript. Last but not least, contracted consultant companies Ricardo AEA and Bio

by Deloitte are greatly acknowledged for their invaluable contribution to this study.

JRC, Seville, December 2016


18

1 Introduction

As part of the Energy Union Package, the European Commission committed to issuing

a Communication on Waste-to-Energy (WtE). The aim of the Communication is to

maximise the potential of WtE, by facilitating a joined-up approach in both energy and

resource efficiency policies, and the transition to a Circular Economy.

Member States are obliged under the EUs revised Waste Framework Directive

(Directive 2008/98/EC) to apply as a priority the waste hierarchy, which ranks waste

management options in order of environmental preference. Energy recovery can

represent a sustainable option for the type of waste that cannot be reused or recycled,

by diverting it from landfill, which could ultimately result in lower greenhouse gas

emissions and in economic, social and environmental benefits (e.g. avoided methane

emissions).

It is also recognised that efficient energy recovery from residual waste can enhance

environmental benefits compared to landfill disposal, make an important contribution

to the EUs renewable energy targets1, and help provide energy security throughout

Member States. However, there is currently a gap between the potential for, and

delivery of, WtE which is resulting in valuable resources going to landfill.

The waste hierarchy options of prevention, reuse, recycling and recovery are not

mutually exclusive and recovering energy from waste is not incompatible with

increasing recycling rates. However, a wide range of pretreatment and thermal

treatment technologies exist that are technically proven to be effective and are also

commercially available in the EU and around the world, and many others are available

at different stages of their development cycle around the world. The selection of the

most environmentally and commercially sustainable technologies for a defined set of

circumstances can be challenging and represent a perceived barrier to investment.

Energy recovery technologies include conventional technologies (both direct

combustion and the combustion of waste-derived fuel) and advanced conversion

technologies (ACT). ACT are broadly categorised into:

pyrolysis;

gasification processes (including emerging waste treatment technologies such as

plasma arc gasification and a combination of pyrolysis and gasification);

liquefaction processes to produce fuels.

Whilst energy recovery from municipal solid waste (MSW) is well established, there is

currently an increasing range of commercial and industrial waste streams for which

energy recovery is being considered as an alternative to landfill. Developments in WtE

technologies have also led to an increased flexibility in how the intermediate products

of energy recovery can be used (i.e. the conversion of biogas into a vehicle fuel or

injection to a gas grid, or the conversion of products of pyrolysis into chemical

commodities.)

Previous work has provided extensive data for the production and use of waste-

derived fuels within the European Union, mainly for the year 2008. However, a more

dynamic approach is now required to provide up-to-date data (up to either 2012 or

1 Insofar as the feedstock used for energy recovery is renewable in nature.


19

2014), to identify trends in the development of WtE in each Member State. Such a

study could provide an outlook on the future of WtE techniques and present a more

comprehensive analysis on the generation of different forms of energy and other

outputs from WtE.

Whilst WtE is prevalent in some Member States, less than 5% of all waste was used

for energy recovery across the EU-28 in 2012. Landfill still dominates waste

management in many EU countries.

2 Purpose of the Study This study is aimed at supporting the forthcoming Communication on Waste-to-Energy

by delivering a robust and up-to-date examination of the current landscape of WtE in

the EU, whilst also investigating how proven and innovative technologies may play a

role in increasing the potential of WtE operations. To this effect, the work was split

into three main tasks:

Task 1: Provide an analysis of the current use of waste streams for energy recovery

in the EU-28:

o Sub-task 1.1: Produce a comprehensive database for the generation, use

and energy recovery from 20 waste streams for the EU-28 over the period

2009 to the most recent year for which reliable data are available; and

o Sub-task 1.2: Identify the main trends in the deployment of WtE in each

Member State and provide an explanation as to why WtE has evolved

differently across the EU-28.

Task 2: Provide an analysis of the technical improvement potential for waste-to-

energy.

o Sub-task 2.1: Identify techniques that demonstrate the greatest potential

to improve current WtE operations, without resulting in a negative impact

on the environment or human health when compared to existing WtE

operations.

o Sub-task 2.2: For each of the techniques identified in Task 2.1, evaluate

two key criteria: net annual average energy efficiency and applicability. This

process identifies the WtE techniques with the highest potential, which are

subject to a more detailed analysis in a next phase of the study.

o Sub-task 2.3: Detailed analysis of WtE techniques.

Expert Workshop: An expert workshop was held on 9 March, 2016 to obtain input

for the study from key stakeholders. The feedback from the workshop and

subsequent written feedback from stakeholders was incorporated into the

methodology and content of this report.

Task 3: The objective of this final task was to draw together the current status and

use of waste streams which could be appropriate for the recovery of energy (from

Task 1) with the WtE technical improvement potential identified in Task 2.


20

This report and its conclusions should help to highlight how industry and authorities

can improve the WtE landscape by providing guidance and improving knowledge

and understanding. Such advances will help to remove barriers to WtE technologies

by ensuring that all related information is readily available.

2.1 Purpose of the study in relation to ongoing BREF work

At the time of writing, the JRC was reviewing the Best Available Techniques (BAT)

REFerence document for Waste Incineration (the WI BREF) which was first published

in 2006. The review of the WI BREF is expected to be finalised around 2018. The

objective of the WI BREF review is to establish new benchmarks for the environmental

performance of waste incineration plants over the next decade, including a

consideration of energy performance.

However, it should be stressed that this report is not intended to overlap with the WI

BREF review, or the development or review of any other BREF by the JRC's services.

The approach, timeline and objectives of the study presented in this report were also

completely different from those of the widely known "Sevilla Process" that forms the

basis for developing and reviewing BREF documents.

2.2 Study constraints

This study is solely focused on identifying opportunities to better exploit the technical

potential of WtE when a waste cannot be prevented, recycled or reused. Therefore,

the study does not include the following:

Analysis of non-waste fuels (e.g. virgin biomass).

Analysis of techniques for landfill gas capture to produce biogas for power

generation, since this relates to waste already disposed by landfilling.

Techniques focused on recycling.

A consideration of commercial aspects which may restrict the implementation of the

technical potential of WtE.

A detailed analysis of the mass/energy balance for each technique or for any

pretreatment which is required to implement a technique. In Section 4.2.1.3, the

study provides an estimation of the energy input required for waste pretreatment in

order to produce Solid Recovered Fuel (SRF).

Finally, it should be mentioned that the current study had to be performed in a very

short timeframe (from November 2015 to October 2016), which did not allow for a

more in-depth analysis of certain issues highlighted in this document.


21

3 Task 1 - Analysis of the current use of waste for energy recovery in the EU-28

Task 1 aims at providing an analysis of the current use of combustible wastes in

waste-to-energy operations in the EU-28.

3.1 Scope of the study

3.1.1 Scope of combustible wastes studied

Definition of waste as part of this study

For the purpose of this study, waste is defined based on the Waste Framework

Directive (WFD) (2008/98/EC) as any substance or object which the holder discards or

intends to or is required to discard.

Substances and materials which are residues of production or consumption processes

may or may not be waste, and a distinction between residue and waste should be

made.

In particular, the WFD includes in Article 5 a definition of by-products and the main

conditions which must be met by a substance or object in order to be classified as a

by-product. A substance or object resulting from a production process, the primary

aim of which is not the production of that item, may not be regarded at waste, but as

being a by-product only if the following conditions are met:

(a) further use of the substance or object is certain;

(b) the substance or object can be used directly without any further processing

other than normal industrial practice;

(c) the substance or object is produced as an integral part of a production process;

and

(d) further use is lawful, i.e. the substance or object fulfils all relevant product,

environmental and health protection requirements for the specific purpose and will

not lead to overall adverse environmental or human health impacts.

Type of wastes included in the scope of the study

The scope of the study includes solid, liquid and gaseous combustible wastes that can

be used as energy sources. They can be divided into two categories:

Combustible wastes that are always waste-derived but not necessarily transformed

into fuels (e.g. wood waste, waste oil, sorted residues), called waste streams in

this report.

Combustible wastes that are always used as fuels, called waste-derived fuels in

this report. It should be noted that such fuels, e.g. biodiesel, bioethanol or biogas,

can also be derived from non-waste feedstock. Therefore, for this category the

scope of the study is limited to the share of fuel that is waste-derived. It should be

noted as well that waste-derived fuels such as biodiesel and biogas can be produced

from waste streams that fall into the previous category, leading to a possible risk of

double counting. This problem is further discussed in Section 3.1.5.

In conclusion, in this study, combustible wastes is a generic expression used to

refer to waste streams and waste-derived fuels.


22

In contrast, the energy from combustible waste that has already been subjected to

treatment and disposal is outside the scope of the present study. Therefore, landfill

gas capture and urban mining are not discussed in this study.

Scope of the study in relation to the hierarchy for waste management

The scope of the study is in line with the hierarchy for waste management as defined

by the Waste Framework Directive. Therefore, it focuses on combustible wastes that

are not able to be prevented, reused or recycled in an economically and

environmentally sound way. As a consequence, it should not be seen as a stimulus for

more energy recovery when options are available that are ranked higher in the waste

hierarchy. In other words, the treatment option which is highest in the waste

hierarchy should always be considered first before descending to less environmentally

favourable options, even for waste streams representing a high calorific value.

However, considering that the technical, economic and environmental feasibility of

waste material recovery changes with time and geography, the scope of the study also

includes combustible wastes that are currently recycled in some parts of Europe, such

as plastic wastes, waste oil, etc.

List of combustible wastes studied

The list of combustible wastes studied is partially based on the scope of the Waste

Framework Directive. According to the provisions of WFD Article 22, this excludes in

particular straw and woodchips. In addition, this study also includes animal faeces and

sludge that are not considered in the WFD.

The constitution of this list is based on two main sources of information (see Table

1.1):

1) The list of the main combustible wastes sent for incineration (with and without

energy recovery). This information comes from Eurostat Waste Statistics.

2) The list of 18 combustible wastes studied in the 2011 second interim report

from Umweltbundesamt (UBA) called Waste-derived fuels: Characterisation

and suitability for end-of-waste (henceforth referred to as UBA 2011 report).

The list of 18 combustible wastes studied in this report:

Waste streams:

1. Wood waste

2. Plastic waste

3. Paper waste

4. Textile waste

5. Tyres and rubber waste

6. Waste solvents

7. Oil waste (used oils)

8. Chemical waste

9. Household and similar waste

10. Mixed and undifferentiated materials

11. Sorting residues

2 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32008L0098.


23

12. Animal and vegetal waste3

13. Dried municipal sewage sludge

Waste-derived fuels:

14. Biogas

15. Bioethanol

16. Biodiesel

17. Gaseous output from gasification

18. Gaseous, liquid and solid output from pyrolysis

The production and treatment of Solid Recovered Fuels (SRF) is addressed in Section

3.3.11 on sorting residues.

According to Table 1.1, the 18 studied combustible wastes account for 96% of the

total theoretically available energy contained in all combustible wastes sent for

incineration (with and without energy recovery) in the EU-28 in 2012.

3.1.2 Note on terminology

The definition of the 13 aforementioned waste streams is provided in Section 3.3. In

addition, Figure 1.1 shows the scope of these waste streams according to their origin

(municipal waste, and commercial and industrial waste) and method of collection. It

should be noted that even though construction and demolition waste (C&DW) is not

included in Figure 1.1, it is included in the scope of the study.

Figure 1.1: Scope of the waste streams considered in the study (source: Deloitte/JRC).

Looking at Figure 1.1, there is a clear distinction between household and similar

wastes (HSW) and municipal solid waste (MSW): in principle, HSW does not cover

source-separated materials (e.g. glass or paper), whereas MSW does cover such

materials. The amount of total MSW produced per capita is roughly double the amount

of HSW produced.

3 Composed of three waste sub-streams: Animal and mixed food waste, Animal faeces, urine and manure and vegetal waste.


24

3.1.3 Comparison of the energy contained in several combustible wastes

sent to incineration

In Table 1.1, the total theoretically available energy contained in waste is calculated

by multiplying the amount of combustible wastes sent for (co)incineration4 by their

average lower heating values (based on various sources detailed in Annex 1). This

calculated data does not take into account technological advances in terms of energy

efficiencies. Therefore, it does not provide an estimate of the current energy

recovered from waste, but it can be used to compare the theoretically available energy

for recovery from various combustible wastes.

Table 1.1: Total theoretically available energy contained in waste sent to incineration (D10 +R1) in the EU-28 in 2012 (Source: Eurostat Energy Statistics and Deloitte calculations) in blue, waste categories included in the list of 18 combustible wastes

Total incinerated (R1 + D10)

Lower Heating Value

Total energy amount contained

in incinerated waste

Related combustible

wastes category(4)

Thousand tonnes or

million Nm3 MJ/kg or MJ/Nm3 PJ % (7)

Waste streams

Animal and vegetal wastes (1)

Animal and mixed

food waste 2,080 17 35 2%

12 Animal faeces, urine and manure

1,030 6 6 0%

Vegetal wastes 1,750 16 28 1%

Chemical and medical wastes (1)

Acid, alkaline or

saline wastes 130 n.a.(6) 0 0%

Chemical wastes 3,740 25 93 5% 8

Health care and biological wastes

1,150 24 28 1%

Industrial effluent sludges

2,700 10 26 1%

Sludges and liquid wastes from waste

treatment

370 10 4 0%

Spent solvents 1,070 28 29 2% 7

Used oils 1,060 31 32 2% 6

Dried municipal sewage sludges (3)

Municipal sludges 2,306 10 22 1% 14

Equipment (1)

Batteries and

accumulators wastes 0 n.a. 0 0%

Discarded equipment

40 15 1 0%

Discarded vehicles 0 n.a. 0 0%

Waste containing PCB

10 15 0 0%

Mineral and solidified wastes (1)

Combustion wastes 630 15 9 0%

Dredging spoils 0 n.a. 0 0%

Mineral waste from construction and

1,460 n.a. 0 0%

4 Based on Eurostat Waste Statistics, Eurostat Water Statistics and Eurostat Energy Statistics databases, and other information provided by European experts and federations.


25

Total incinerated (R1 + D10)

Lower Heating Value

Total energy amount contained

in incinerated waste

Related combustible

wastes category(4)

Thousand tonnes or

million Nm3 MJ/kg or MJ/Nm3 PJ % (7)

demolition

Mineral wastes from waste treatment and stabilised wastes

220 n.a. 0 0%

Other mineral

wastes 230 n.a. 0 0%

Soils 50 n.a. 0 0%

Mixed ordinary wastes (1)

Household and similar wastes

52,180 9 470 25% 9

Mixed and undifferentiated

materials

11,480 13 149 8% 10

Sorting residues 22,280 15 334 18% 11

Recyclable wastes (1)

Glass wastes 0 n.a. 0 0%

Metal wastes, ferrous

40 n.a. 0 0%

Metal wastes, mixed

ferrous and non-

ferrous

0 n.a. 0 0%

Metal wastes, non-ferrous

10 n.a. 0 0%

Paper and cardboard

wastes 340 17 6 0% 3

Plastic wastes 1,700 36 61 3% 2

Wastes tyres 1,195 29 35 2% 5

Textile wastes 140 17 2 0% 4

Wood wastes 27,960 13 375 20% 1

Waste-derived fuels (2)

Waste-derived

biogas 4,225 26 108 6% 15

Waste-derived

biodiesel 520 37 19 1% 16

Waste-derived bioethanol

~0 n.a. ~0 0% 17

Gaseous output from gasification

~0 n.a. ~0 0% 18

Gaseous, liquid and solid output from

pyrolysis

~0 n.a. ~0 0% 19

Total 137,871 (5) 1,873 100% (1) Categories used in Eurostat Waste Statistics (see descriptions in following paragraphs). (2) Categories not included in Eurostat Waste Statistics, but used in the UBA 2011 report (see

descriptions in following paragraphs). (3) Category used in Eurostat Water Statistics (see descriptions in following paragraphs). (4) The numbers refer to the above list of 18 combustible wastes. (5) Total in thousand tonnes excluding biogas. (6) n.a. = not applicable. (7) The % values are rounded to the nearest whole number which explains why the total % seems

different to 100%.


26

3.1.4 Scope of the data

3.1.4.1 Period for data collection

The data collection targeted the period 2006-2016. The Eurostat Waste Statistics

database was the main source of information and it provides information at two-year

intervals. The 2014 waste statistics were not available at the time of writing, so 2012

is the most recent year for which waste statistics data could be used.

3.1.4.2 Type of data collected

For each EU-28 country, the data collection focused on the following criteria:

Amount of combustible waste generated.

Import/export into/outside the EU-28 is also studied whenever relevant.

Amount of waste treated, for the following categories5:

o Incineration / energy recovery (R1);

o Incineration on land / Disposal (D10);

o Disposal (D1, D2, D3, D4, D5, D6, D7, D12);

o Recovery other than energy recovery (R2 to R11).

Amount of energy recovered, for the following categories:

o Conversion into heat with direct use: mostly relevant for cement kilns;

o Conversion into heat for steam production;

o Conversion into electricity;

o Biogas conversion into biomethane.

Conversion into liquid biofuel is studied separately as part of waste-derived ethanol

and waste-derived biodiesel production (see Sections 3.4.2 and 3.4.3 respectively).

Waste treatment categories should be understood as follows5:

Recovery other than energy recovery means any operation the principal result of

which is waste serving a useful purpose by replacing other materials which would

otherwise have been used to fulfil a particular function, or waste being prepared to

fulfil that function, in the plant or in the wider economy.

Note that recycling is a subset of recovery and means any recovery operation by

which waste materials are reprocessed into products, materials or substances,

whether for the original or other purposes. It includes the reprocessing of organic

material (e.g. composting, anaerobic digestion) but excludes its use as fuel and its

use for backfilling operations.

In this report, material recovery refers to recovery other than energy recovery.

Disposal means any operation which is not recovery even where the operation has

as a secondary consequence the reclamation of substances or energy.

Annex 2 also provides the definition of all treatment methods for recovery (R1 to R10)

and for disposal (D1 to D12).

5 Definitions of waste treatment methods and related categories (R1, D10, etc.) are provided in the Eurostat Manual on waste statistics.


27

3.1.5 Risk of double counting

To provide an overview of combustible waste generation and treatment in the EU-28,

it is necessary to add up the figures for the 18 combustible wastes studied (see Table

1.1). However, the result is not correct as some wastes are counted more than once.

As part of the present study, double counting mostly occurs in the following situations:

Eurostat data on waste generation: for consistency reasons, the current

methodology for the estimation of combustible waste generation uses - when

possible - data from the Eurostat Waste Statistics database. As explained in further

detail in Section 3.5.1, Eurostat data on waste generation shall cover all waste

(primary and secondary) generated by the statistical units, which means that double

counting of waste is part of the concept. This also means that sorting residues are

already accounted for as part of other waste streams.

Eurostat data on waste treatment: only waste sent to final treatment should be

reported to Eurostat; treated waste should thus be counted only once. However,

there is also evidence of double counting for HSW sent to MBT (Mechanical

Biological Treatment) plants.

Waste-derived biogas production: in the Eurostat Waste Statistics database, the

fermentation of biodegradable wastes for biogas production is not accounted for

under the categories incineration or energy recovery, but instead under the

category recovery other than energy recovery along with other treatment methods

(such as composting). Therefore, it is not possible to estimate the production of

waste-derived biogas for each organic waste stream studied (in particular for

Animal and vegetal waste (A&VW) and Municipal sewage sludge (MSS)). Waste-

derived biogas is studied separately, which represents double counting. However,

waste-derived biogas is expressed in Nm3 (whereas other waste-derived biogas

feedstocks (A&VW, MSS) are in tonnes), and energy recovery from these feedstocks

is only accounted for once, because the Eurostat Waste Statistics database does not

provide it.

Waste-derived biodiesel: most of the waste-derived biodiesel production in the EU-

28 comes from waste edible oil and fat, which are also included in the waste

category Animal and vegetal wastes. However, data on edible oil and fat

generation and treatment are difficult to find and most data provided by Member

States to Eurostat do not account for it. Considering that waste-derived biodiesel

represents a growing market for energy recovery, it was decided to study it as a

separate combustible waste.

3.2 Methodology for Task 1

3.2.1 Methodology for creation of the database

The figure below shows the four-step methodology used to create the database.

Step 1: draft database

In order to ensure results that are harmonised and comparable with the 2011 study

from UBA, for combustible wastes that are common to both studies, the data

collection started with the methodology and key assumptions used by UBA for

combustible wastes that are common to both studies. The construction of the draft

database was completed with up-to-date bibliographic research.


28

Step 2: discussion with European federations

Key EU federations were contacted to discuss the main assumptions of the draft

methodology. The draft database was then updated according to their feedback.

Step 3: workshop with national and European experts

The updated database and first elements of the data analysis were presented in a

background document. This document was sent to national and European experts,

who were invited to attend a one-day stakeholder workshop organised in Seville.

Following this workshop, numerous inputs were received (assumptions, ratios used,

other existing databases) and implemented. Inputs related to specific national data

were not used in the calculations for consistency reasons. However, they were taken

into account to analyse the robustness of the results.

Step 4: final database

The final database was compiled using the latest feedbacks that stakeholders provided

after reading the draft final report.

3.2.2 Analysis of the trends at European and national levels

The analysis is based on compiled databases for the years 2006 to 2012 (or later

whenever available). For trends related to the waste treatment method, a specific

focus was on the waste hierarchy. In addition, Member States were asked to provide

inputs to explain unexpected past evolutions or their outlook for developments of

waste management practices. Whenever provided, these explanations are included in

the analysis of the trends.

3.3 Results of waste streams data collection and analysis

3.3.1 Wood wastes

Generation of wood wastes

Data on the generation of wood wastes comes from Eurostat Waste Statistics.

Eurostats EWC-Stat category 07.5 Wood wastes contains hazardous and non-

hazardous wastes.

The category and main NACE sectors that produce wood wastes are described as

follows by the Eurostat Manual on waste statistics6:

Wood wastes (07.5): These wastes are wooden packaging, sawdust, shavings,

cuttings, waste bark, cork and wood from the production of pulp and paper; wood

from the construction and demolition of buildings; and separately collected wood

waste. They mainly originate from wood processing, the pulp and paper industry and

the demolition of buildings but can occur in all sectors in lower quantities due to

wooden packaging. Wood wastes are hazardous when containing hazardous

substances like mercury or tar-based wood preservatives.

Copper, chromium and arsenic (CCA) are also used for wood treatment and found in

hazardous wood waste.

6 Additional information can be found in the Guidance on classification of waste according to EWC-Stat categories document.


29

Table 1.2: Evolution of the generation of wood wastes by Member State (Source: Eurostat Waste Statistics)

Wood waste generation (thousand tonnes/yr)

2006 2008 2010 2012

Austria 6,300 6,232 1,295 888

Belgium 1,797 1,573 2,779 4,193

Bulgaria 161 327 115 201

Croatia 199 195 174 97

Cyprus 33 17 24 14

Czech Republic 638 248 303 238

Denmark 864 892 304 232

Estonia 1,791 1,288 871 816

Finland7 13,338 12,477 12,281 11,941

France 7,478 8,682 8,945 6,051

Germany 8,835 10,271 10,812 11,713

Greece 745 830 350 121

Hungary 482 336 287 242

Ireland 401 147 508 201

Italy 2,469 3,448 3,760 3,901

Latvia 240 87 87 56

Lithuania 220 231 300 182

Luxembourg 85 74 111 87

Malta 1.0 0.4 8.2 13.3

Netherlands 1,944 2,272 2,561 2,572

Poland 2,808 3,367 3,508 3,949

Portugal 1,233 736 905 824

Romania 1,466 1,806 2,340 2,058

Slovakia 768 629 239 401

Slovenia 1,154 470 334 339

Spain 1,909 1,932 1,624 1,247

Sweden 4,689 4,508 1,863 1,171

United Kingdom 7,607 4,398 2,827 3,742

Total EU-28 69,656 67,476 59,515 57,489

Table 1.2 shows that the EU-28 wood waste production has been consistently

decreasing between 2006 and 2012, with a very significant decrease (of 13%)

between 2010 and 2008.

Based on data from Table 1.2, Figure 1.2 shows the evolution of the generation of

wood wastes for the 14 Member States that were responsible for more than 96% of

the overall generation in 2012.

7 Since 2013, Finland has changed its methodology for the reporting of wood wastes to Eurostat and data for 2013 will be around 3 million tonnes compared to 12 million tonnes for 2012.


30

Figure 1.2: Evolution of the generation of wood wastes for the 14 main EU-28 producers in 2012 (Source: Eurostat Waste Statistics in thousand tonnes/yr)

Looking at the main EU-28 producers, we can see different trends among countries

from 2006 until 2012. While it appears that wood waste generation is decreasing in

Finland, Sweden and Austria, it is increasing in Germany and Belgium.

In the case of Spain the decrease in wood waste generation may be due to the

collapse of the construction sector since 2008, which previously demanded a

significant amount of wood-based products. No further information was provided by

Member States that might explain the figures.

It should be noted that reporting on wood waste is extremely difficult, subject to

interpretation and sometimes changes due to evolution in the reporting methodology

(see Finland in Table 1.2). Indeed, it is difficult to distinguish between virgin and

pretreated wood, wood waste used in production processes and wood waste used for

energy recovery. Further difficulties may arise due to the fact that wood waste is often

recovered internally. Therefore, Eurostat data for wood waste generation should be

used carefully.

Import/export into/outside the EU-28

Quantities of imported and exported wood waste into/outside the EU-28 were collected

from the Eurostat COMEXT Database. Quantities are available on a monthly and yearly

basis from 1988 to 2008. For the purpose of the study, yearly imported and exported

quantities from 2006 to 2008 were considered. Relevant data were identified based on

their CN8 code. According to the methodology used in the UBA 2011 study, the

following CN8 codes were used for wood wastes:

WDF CN8 Code Description

Waste wood 44013090

Wood waste and scrap, whether or not agglomerated in logs, briquettes, pellets or similar forms (excl. sawdust)

45019000 Cork waste; crushed, powdered or ground cork


31

Table 1.3 shows that the EU-28 has a growing negative trade balance which

represented 2% of the wood wastes generated in the EU-28 in 2006 and 3% in 2008.

Table 1.3: Evolution of wood wastes trade outside the EU-28 (Source: Eurostat COMEXT Database)

Import/export into/outside the EU-28 (thousand tonnes/yr)

Import Export Trade balance

2006 1,390 137 -1,252

2008 1,917 168 -1,748

2010 NA NA NA

2012 NA NA NA

2014 NA NA NA

Unfortunately no data are available for the years after 2008.

Treatment of wood waste

Wood waste treatment data comes from Eurostat Waste Statistics. Eurostat provides

data on material recovery for the years 2006, 2008, 2010 and 2012, but data on other

methods of treatment (energy recovery, incineration on land, and landfill) is only

available for the years 2010 and 2012.

Table 1.4: Evolution of the wood wastes sent for energy recovery by Member State (Source: Eurostat Waste Statistics)

2010 (thousand tonnes/yr) 2012 (thousand tonnes/yr)

Energy recovery

(R1) Incineration/

Disposal (D10) Energy recovery

(R1) Incineration/

Disposal (D10)

Austria 330 3.8 446 0.0

Belgium 732 314.6 136 785.9

Bulgaria 89 0.2 79 0.1

Croatia 71 1.0 21 0.0

Cyprus 2 2.5 0 0.0

Czech Republic 36 0.4 26 1.3

Denmark 25 0.0 30 0.0

Estonia 265 0.0 289 0.0

Finland 7,649 15.5 8,426 44.4

France 1,601 266.5 1,614 92.5

Germany 6,915 158.5 8,260 5.2

Greece 39 0.0 11 0.0

Hungary 36 0.9 29 0.3

Ireland 73 17.0 18 0.0

Italy 867 44.8 776 12.8

Latvia 4 0.0 6 0.5

Lithuania 101 0.0 85 0.1

Luxembourg 0 0.0 0 0.0

Malta 0 0.0 0 0.0

Netherlands 904 17.5 1,043 10.8

Poland 2,582 2.8 2,286 1.6

Portugal 490 1.1 585 0.8

Romania 1,173 0.2 1,039 0.2

Slovakia 67 0.3 56 5.0


32

2010 (thousand tonnes/yr) 2012 (thousand tonnes/yr)

Energy recovery

(R1) Incineration/

Disposal (D10) Energy recovery

(R1) Incineration/

Disposal (D10)

Slovenia 172 0.8 202 0.1

Spain 3 0.3 3 0.0

Sweden 1,373 1.6 1,191 2.5

United Kingdom 248 0.0 347 0.0

Total EU-28 25,840 850.0 27,000 960.0

Between 2010 and 2012 the amount of wood wastes sent for energy recovery

increased by 4% at the EU-28 level. While in most EU-28 countries this amount was

stable or slightly decreasing, Finland and Germany, the two countries sending the

most wood waste for energy recovery, increased the amount they sent for energy

recovery by 10% and 19% respectively.

Figure 1.3 shows the repartition of wood waste treatment methods for the 14 EU-28

countries representing 99% of wood wastes sent to incineration and energy recovery

in 2012.

Figure 1.3: Treatment of wood wastes for the 14 EU-28 main contributors to energy recovery from wood waste in 2012 (Source: Eurostat Waste Statistics in thousand tonnes/yr)

Figure 1.4 gives an overview of the repartition of wood waste treatment methods in

the EU-28 and its evolution between 2010 and 2012. While at the EU-28 level similar

amounts of wood wastes were sent for energy recovery and material disposal, Figure

1.3 shows that some Member States focused their treatment strategy on energy

recovery while other countries sent more wood wastes to material recovery.


33

Figure 1.4: Evolution of wood waste treatment methods in the EU-28 (Source: Eurostat Waste Statistics in thousand tonnes/yr)

It is important to highlight that, according to Eurostat, around 2 million tonnes of

wood waste is considered hazardous waste. Hazardous waste may contain impurities

and hazardous compounds which may not be suitable to be used in co-incineration

plants or additional energy consumption may be required for pretreatment of waste

and emission abatement systems.

3.3.2 Plastic wastes

Generation of plastic wastes

Data on the generation of plastic wastes comes from Eurostat Waste Statistics.

PlasticsEurope, the European Association of Plastic Manufacturers, provides annual

data on plastic production, consumption and plastic wastes management in the EU-28.

However, it is difficult to compare it with Eurostat data because the scope is not the

same: the scope of PlasticsEuropes data is broader as it represents all post-consumer

plastics generated. For instance, in 2012 in the EU-28, collected post-consumer plastic

wastes reached 25 million tonnes8, while 17 million tonnes of plastic wastes were

reported by Member States to Eurostat (see Table 1.5). Plastic waste data reported by

PlasticsEurope is probably included in other Eurostat categories besides the category

plastic waste (07.4), in particular household and similar wastes. PlasticsEuropes

data is however useful to comment on plastic waste trends in the EU-28.

Eurostats EWC-Stat category 07.4 plastic wastes contains only non-hazardous

wastes. The category and main NACE sectors that produce plastic wastes are

described as follows by the Eurostat Manual on waste statistics9:

Plastic wastes (07.4): These are plastic packaging; plastic waste from plastic

production and machining of plastics; plastic waste from sorting and preparation

processes; and separately collected plastic waste. They originate from all sectors as

packaging waste, from sectors producing plastic products and from separate sorting

by businesses and households. All plastic wastes are non-hazardous. A distinction

8 http://www.plasticseurope.org/Document/plastics-the-facts-2012.aspx. 9 Additional information can be found in the Guidance on classification of waste according to EWC-Stat categories document.


34

should be made between plastic wastes and mixed packaging that belongs to the

category mixed and undifferentiated materials.

Table 1.5: Evolution of the generation of plastic wastes by Member State (Source: Eurostat Waste Statistics)

Plastic waste generation (thousand tonnes/yr)

2006 2008 2010 2012

Austria 350 641 565 358

Belgium 632 1,075 698 611

Bulgaria 26 73 60 100

Croatia 186 30 25 39

Cyprus 57 68 84 74

Czech Republic 214 232 254 326

Denmark 54 73 79 107

Estonia 90 94 25 23

Finland 125 87 71 91

France 1,166 1,551 1,437 1,647

Germany 1,414 1,936 2,288 2,530

Greece 755 673 227 133

Hungary 147 150 151 186

Ireland 358 39 335 126

Italy 1,564 1,609 2,141 2,733

Latvia 12 9 8 22

Lithuania 30 31 40 51

Luxembourg 32 20 27 26

Malta 1 2 4 4

Netherlands 378 410 518 610

Poland 325 407 863 970

Portugal 996 193 224 214

Romania 580 419 564 649

Slovakia 75 94 111 108

Slovenia 43 47 56 48

Spain 1,617 1,904 1,465 1,143

Sweden 188 223 219 176

United Kingdom 3,447 2,489 3,660 3,986

Total EU-28 14,863 14,578 16,201 17,091

Table 1.5 shows that EU-28 plastic waste production has been increasing since 2008,

after a small decrease from 2006 to 2008.

PlasticsEuropes data for 2012 to 2014 is in line with the small increase shown in Table

1.5: the five countries (Germany, Italy, France, the UK and Spain) representing two

thirds of the plastics demand show a small upward trend over the period10. This

increase is, however, much smaller than the evolution presented in Figure 1.5.

10 http://www.plasticseurope.org/Document/plastics---the-facts-2015.aspx.


35

Based on data from Eurostat in Table 1.5, Figure 1.5 shows the evolution of the

generation of plastic wastes for the 14 Member States responsible for more than 94%

of the overall generation in 2012.

Figure 1.5: Evolution of the generation of plastic wastes for the 14 main EU-28 producers in 2012 (Source: Eurostat Waste Statistics in thousand tonnes/yr)

The three biggest producers (the UK, Italy and Germany) represent 54% of the total

plastic wastes generated. According to Figure 1.5, the amount of plastic wastes

generated increased by 60% in the UK from 2008 to 2012 and by 75% and 79% in

Italy and Germany from 2006 to 2012 respectively.

In contrast, Greece ranks as the fifteenth biggest EU-28 producer in 2012 with around

130,000 tonnes of plastic wastes, while it ranked as the seventh biggest producer in

2006 with more than 750,000 tonnes of plastic wastes.

In the case of Spain, the decrease may be due to both the effect of the economic crisis

on consumption and a change in methodology in order to avoid double counting. No

further information was provided by Member States that might explain the figures.

PlasticsEuropes data for plastic packaging waste generation in countries presented in

Figure 1.5 shows similar figures for the UK, Italy and France, but higher figures for

Germany. Eurostat data should be considered with caution because no explanation

could be found for the fact that the UK reports much more plastic waste than Italy,

Germany or France.

Import/export into/outside the EU-28

Quantities of imported and exported plastic wastes into/outside the EU-28 were

collected from the Eurostat COMEXT Database. Quantities are available on a monthly

and yearly basis from 1988 to 2014. For the purpose of the study, yearly imported

and exported quantities from 2006 to 2014 were considered. Relevant data were

identified based on their CN8 code. According to the methodology used in the UBA

2011 report, the following CN8 codes were used for plastic wastes:


36

WDF CN8 Code Description

Waste plastics (production residues)

39151000 Waste, parings and scrap of polymers of ethylene

39152000 Waste, parings and scrap of polymers of styrene

39153000 Waste, parings and scrap of polymers of vinyl chloride

39159011 Waste, parings and scrap of polymers of propylene

39159018 Waste, parings and scrap, of addition polymerization products (excl. that of polymers of ethylene, styrene and vinyl chloride and propylene)

39159090 Waste, parings and scrap, of plastics (excl. that of additional

polymerization products)

Table 1.6 shows that the EU-28 has a positive trade balance, which represented

around 13% of EU-28 plastic waste generation in 2010 and 12% in 2012. This trade

towards a better exploitation of the technical potential...

Documents